Comments on: Residents Frustrated by Dioxane Decision it's like being there Tue, 16 Sep 2014 04:56:38 +0000 hourly 1 By: K Thompson K Thompson Thu, 14 Apr 2011 12:41:03 +0000 Thank you for the detailed reporting. I can’t believe that it has been over 25 years! Nor can I believe the ‘safe’ level (as if–) has been raised from 3 ppb to 85 ppb, let alone the thousands higher permitted in some.areas, and a creek ? A creek ??!!

By: Vince Caruso Vince Caruso Tue, 12 Apr 2011 03:08:02 +0000 As a member of the Allen’s Creek Watershed Group I would have to ask why groundwater moving through the city that flows into homes on a regular basis is not a concern for the regulators. This seems very obvious for many who have asked about basement contamination.

Also Judge Sheldon should hire a Court Master (expert in toxicology and geology) to help understand this complex issue. He can use part of the $5M Pall owes him for not meeting a past deadline. Our state attorney’s office has done a very poor job representing the community. We could use all the help we can get in court.

Additionally some issues not discussed at the meeting are: city construction that pumps water in order to put in foundations has gotten a lot more complicated; what about the solvent effect of this plume on river sediment contamination being liberated to contaminate the river water. Both seem unintended consequences not considered in this very simplistic and unrealistic cleanup plan.

By: Roger Rayle Roger Rayle Sat, 09 Apr 2011 03:24:22 +0000 The video of the whole 3/30/2011 DEQ Public Meeting is viewable on this Youtube playlist: [link]

Some other videos about the Pall/Gelman site are at [link]

Also, just to correct a couple of points in this article… The last time Pall did a calculation of how much dioxane was left about 10 years ago when they figured there was about 80,000 pounds of dioxane left in the groundwater. Since then they have removed much more than this… and refuse to calculate how much is left (or maybe the DEQ hasn’t asked them to like we wanted.)

The size of the plume HAS changed significantly in the last 15 years… most notably because of the discovery of the deeper E unit plume that the company (and the DEQ) chose to ignore from 1993 to 2001, when the one well known to be screened at that depth east of Wagner was left unsampled for over 7 years. If that well, MW-30d, had been sampled all along, the dramatic rise in dioxane contamination in the deep E unit contamination would have been apparent… and maybe contamination and shutdown of the City’s Northwest Supply Well could have been avoided.

Some of that deeper plume now may be heading northerly under the Evergreen area towards Barton Pond where Ann Arbor gets 80-85% of its water. It will be interesting to see if Pall asks to curtail sampling of wells that show this.